Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

[Mark Tinka <mark.tinka () seacom mu>]

On 15/Mar/20 22:51, Frank Habicht wrote:

> thanks for the "quotes", Mark. I agree.
>
> https://www.caida.org/publications/presentations/2018/investigating_causes_congestion_african_afrinic/investigating_causes_congestion_african_afrinic.pdf
>
> page 23:
> Results Overview
> • No evidence of widespread congestion
>    - 2.2% of discovered link showed evidence of congestion at the end of
>      our measurements campaign
>
> page 34:
> Conclusions
> • Measured IXPs were congestion-free, which promotes peering in the
>   region
>
> https://conferences.sigcomm.org/imc/2017/papers/imc17-final182.pdf
>
> my conclusion: s/congestion/congestion or the lack thereof/g
>
> Frank Habicht
>
> PS: yes, i could name peers that once had inadequate links into an IXP.
> but for how long did that happen? (yes..., any minute is too long...)

Indeed.

There was a time when backhaul links between ISP routers at the exchange
point and their nearest PoP were based on E1's, wireless, e.t.c. But
that could be said of, pretty much, every exchange point that kicked off
inside of the last 2.5 decades.

Nowadays, such links, if they exist, are the very deep exception, not
the rule.

Mark.